Report: Sotomayor Says Cameras in Court Could Do More Harm Than Good

Justice Sonia Sotomayor said this week that she thinkstelevising Supreme Court oral arguments might do more harm than good, accordingto New York Magazine.

"I think the process could be more misleading than helpful,"she said in an event in New York promoting her new book, according to themagazine. "It's like reading tea leaves. I think if people analyzed it, it istrue that in almost every argument you can find a hint of what every judgewould rule. But most justices are actually probing all the arguments...EverySupreme Court decision is rendered with a majority opinion that goes carefullythrough the analysis of the case and why the end result was reached. Everyonefully explains their views. Looking at oral argument is not going to give youthat explanation."

That is a retrenchment somewhat fromher brief statement in her confirmation hearing that she had had positiveexperiences with cameras in the court tests before joining the high court.

There is no consensus on the court on the issue, withopinions ranging from Antonin Scalia's strong opposition, to Justice ElenaKagan's enthusiastic support. Sotomayor was sounding more like she was movingtoward the Scalia camp. He has said that he thinks cameras would distort, notilluminate, the court's work via clips that do not represent the sometimes"dull, lawyerly stuff" that goes into the process. For every person who watchedcoverage gavel-to-gavel, he has said, "there would be 100,000 who wouldwatch a 15-second take-out from the C-SPAN feed. And I guarantee you that the15-second take-out would not be characteristic of what we do. It would be manbites dog, so why should I participate in the miseducation of the Americanpeople?"